> Can anyone shed some light on the motivation for these frauds?
Money and prestige while it lasts?
> Is there something in particular about the Japanese ecosystem that makes them more common?
Well, the article states the following:
> Michiie Sakamoto, who is leading another investigation at Keio University, into Iwamoto's studies in animals, says it has to do with respect. "In Japan, we don't usually doubt a professor," he says. "We basically believe people. We think we don't need strict rules to watch them carefully." As a result, researchers faking their results may be exposed only after they have racked up many publications.
The motivation exists elsewhere. The statement “In Japan, we don’t usually doubt a professor” is also true elsewhere. I don’t usually read any paper with the assumption that data was fabricated (maybe selected, possibly presented in a way to tell the strongest story, but not out-right fake).
So, I still can’t quite put my finger on what is different about the Japanese ecosystem. Perhaps the checks and balances within departments are not as strong?
Outside Japan, a manager or department head seems to have a stronger supervisory role in my limited experience.
Money and prestige while it lasts?
> Is there something in particular about the Japanese ecosystem that makes them more common?
Well, the article states the following:
> Michiie Sakamoto, who is leading another investigation at Keio University, into Iwamoto's studies in animals, says it has to do with respect. "In Japan, we don't usually doubt a professor," he says. "We basically believe people. We think we don't need strict rules to watch them carefully." As a result, researchers faking their results may be exposed only after they have racked up many publications.